You are currently viewing the old forums. We have upgraded to a new NFL Forum. This old forum is being left as a read-only archive.
Please update your bookmarks to our new forum at forums.footballsfuture.com.

Businessweek put together a fun ranking of how all 122 franchises in the four major American professional sports leagues burn their money on player payroll. You might be shocked to find out that most successful teams are intelligent with their spending. The top nine of 10 franchises have been to their league's respective championship game at least once within the last five seasons.

We are one of the best organizations in sports. But this is a flawed list. In the NFL and NBA the best teams spend pretty much the same amount of money. So where those two leagues are concerned we pretty much just have a win ranking here._________________

We are one of the best organizations in sports. But this is a flawed list. In the NFL and NBA the best teams spend pretty much the same amount of money. So where those two leagues are concerned we pretty much just have a win ranking here.

Yeah I saw that too. I guess it still does look good though. We're in the top 10. _________________

We are one of the best organizations in sports. But this is a flawed list. In the NFL and NBA the best teams spend pretty much the same amount of money. So where those two leagues are concerned we pretty much just have a win ranking here.

Absolutely, you're right that the metric is flawed to some degree (majorly in some ways). Just nice to see the recognition.

Actually due to the flawed metric that basically has it as a winning metric for the NFL and NBA teams... and the fact that since drafting Flacco the Ravens have been to the playoffs for 5/6 seasons, reaching the conference championships 3x, with one Super Bowl ring... yeah, we probably should be saying: "Thanks. Joe Flacco." _________________

We are one of the best organizations in sports. But this is a flawed list. In the NFL and NBA the best teams spend pretty much the same amount of money. So where those two leagues are concerned we pretty much just have a win ranking here.

Absolutely, you're right that the metric is flawed to some degree (majorly in some ways). Just nice to see the recognition.

It's flawed in some sense, but in another it's spot on. Ultimately, teams are measured by how successful they are on the field, so ROI is a pretty good indicator of efficiency.

My problem with the results is not the methodology, but the sample size used. Five years is a pretty small window in this day and age of professional sports where contracts are virtually all 4-5 years in duration. A broader sample of ten years would have given a better measurement of how efficient teams are with their respective payrolls, would have showed trending on how they improved (or mantained) success over a longer period of time, and would have factored in roster churn.